From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Wed Dec 10 2003 - 04:24:43 GMT
Hi Mark,
>> Mark 8-12-03: Hi Steve, DNA is a prerequisite of any social or
intellectual
>> patterning that emerges from it. If a male stimulates a female's social or
>> intellectual perception of quality, then that is the DNA which will be
>> advanced.
>
> Steve:
> Fine with me. I was only suggesting that the pattern of women having the
> choice of what DNA gets passed is not biologically latched but socially.
> Here you seem to be saying the same thing.
>
> Mark 8a-12-03: A woman chooses. She chooses Quality. I wish there were more
> woman here to contribute, but as there are not, i will not say anymore.
Steve:
Still fine with me. Are you sure we're disagreeing?
Mark 10-12-03: No, we are not disagreeing. And i am listening friend.
>> Steve (for it is but himself)
>
> What does "for it is but himself" mean (besides nothing)?
>
> Mark 8a-12-03: Lighten up for pity's sake.
Steve:
Are you kidding? You are the one who's gotten all bent out of shape here.
I'm still trying to figure out why.
Mark 10-12-03: My shape has more to do with other matters. I apologise.
> Steve:
> Oh, I thought when you said "there is no such thing as homosexuality!" that
> it meant you thought that there was no such thing as homosexuality. I
> misread you, and my attempt at correcting you is then irrelevant. Your
> statement "I suggested homosexuality may be a social description of
> biological value" is much more clear.
>
> Mark 8a-12-03: Sometimes the in your head are those others would have you
> value?
Steve:
I have no idea what you mean here.
Mark 10-12-03: Not surprising! My mistake. I was trying to indicate the power
of social convention.
>> Again, I disagree that female ownership of choice is a biological pattern.
>>
>> Mark 8-12-03: Any homophobic would of course.
>
> Steve:
> That was uncalled for. What leads you to think that I am homophobic????
>
> Mark 8-12-03: Your lack of humility.
Steve:
Is this a general critique of my contributions or are you saying that in
this particular issue I am not being humble enough for your tastes? In any
case, I can't see how it supports your claim that I am a homophobe. Please
explain.
Mark 10-12-03: I am sure you are a critical thinker trying to make sense of a
difficult topic. And i have been quick to attribute convention as a
motivating factor in your assessment, which is a mistake. I am sorry.
>> Steve:
>> I think that human sexuality is so complex that it is impossible to say to
>> what degree homosexuality is biologically based and to what degree it is a
>> social phenomenon. It's both.
>>
>> Mark 8-12-03: But not before exhibiting your culturally derived innate
>> homophobia i see.
>
> Steve:
> Please explain.
>
> Mark 8-12-03: Let woman speak for themselves.
Steve:
I don't see where I've done otherwise. *You* have spoken for women, saying
that they are sexually attracted to homosexuals. I've made no such claims
nor have I commented on your claim. You seem to me to be thoroughly
confused.
Mark 10-12-03: To be fair to myself, i claim to have observed the above. The
value of my observations may be a different thing altogether?!
> Mark 8-12-03: I am not going to speak on behalf of women. Full stop. If you
> know better and feel able to speak on behalf of women, then fine, but it
seems
> to all you are doing is dictating to women.
Steve:
Again. I don't see where I've spoken on behalf of women. Please show me
where I've committed the egregious error for which you continue to chastise
me.
Mark 10-12-03: You have not. Apologies.
Is there some deeper issue here? Have I said something that contradicts
your understanding of the MOQ and lower myself in your view to the likes of
DMB, Bo, and Matt K? You seem to be quickly running out of people to talk
to in this group. I agree with Wim in often finding your contributions
valuable. Though you voiced frustration at your essay being ignored, you
still seem to have no inclination to participate in the social patterns that
allow intellectual patterns to flourish and choose ad homonym attacks over
reasoned arguments. I really think it's a shame.
Sincerely,
Steve
Mark 10-12-03: The problem is all mine. I wish to apologise for lumping you
with a sorry lot. I am very sorry Steve.
All the best,
Mark
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 10 2003 - 04:25:43 GMT